z 


CIVIL  SERVICE  REFORM 

AND 

MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT. 


PAPERS 

PREPARED  FOR  THE  ANNUAL  MEETING  OF 

The  National  Civil-Service  Reform  League 

CINCINNATI,  OHIO,  DECEMBER  17,  1897, 

BY 

ALBERT  SHAW 

AND 

HORACE  E.  DEMING. 


NEW  YORK : 

PUBLISHED  FOR  THE 

NATIONAL  CIVIL-SERVICE  REFORM  LEAGUE. 
i897- 


Publications  of  the  national  Civil-Service  Reform  League 


Proceedings  at  the  Annual  Meeting  of  the  National  Civil-Ser¬ 
vice  .Reform  League,  1882,  with  address  of  the  President,  George 
William  Curtis.  Per  copy,  8  cts. 


granting  uub  ITabor. 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  Illinois. 

CLASS.  BOOK. 


87, 

cts. 

on* 


2.) 

ress 

:arl 

?5*) 

?6.) 

\d- 

rte. 


The  Influence  of  the  Spoils  Idea  upon  the  Government  of 
American  Cities.  By  Herbert  Welsh.  (1894.) 


The  Reform  of  the  Consular  Service.  By  Oscar  S.  Straus.  (1894.) 
The  Interest  of  the  Workingman  in  Civil-Service  Reform.  By 

Herbert  Welsh.  (1895.) 

T^ie  Appointment  and  Tenure  of  Postmasters.  By  R.  H.  Dana. 

(1895.) 

The  Republican  Party  and  Civil-Service  Reform.  By  Henry 

Hitchcock.  (1897.) 

The  Democratic  Party  and  Civil-Service  Reform.  By  Moorfield 

Storey.  (1897.) 

An  open  Letter  to  Hon.  C.  H.  Grosvenor,  in  reply  to  recent  at¬ 
tacks  on  the  Civil  Service  Law  and  Rules.  George  McAneny. 
(1897.) 

Constitution  of  the  National  Civil-Service  Reform  League. 


Good  Government :  Official  Journal  of  the  National  Civil-Service  1 
Reform  League.  Published  monthly  at  54  William  St.,  New  York.  J 
One  dollar  per  year.  Ten  cents  per  single  copy. 


For  other  publications,  see  third  page 


OAKST.HDSF  !  j  A  *'•’ 

CIVIL  SERVICE  REFORM^  - 


AND 


I  IP  >  ■>  O  1 


MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT. 


PAPERS 


PREPARED  FOR  THE  ANNUAL  MEETING  OF 


The  National  Civil-Service  Reform  League 


CINCINNATI,  OHIO,  DECEMBER  17,  1897, 


ALBERT  SHAW 

AND 

HORACE  E.  DEMING. 


NEW  YORK : 

PUBLISHED  KOR  THE 

NATIONAL  CIVIL-SERVICE  REFORM  LEAGUE. 
i897- 


■  C  C  o  « 
C  C  «  c 


Civil  Service  Reform  and  Municipal -Gd^erii" : 

ment. 


FIRST  PAPER. 


By  Albert  Shaw. 


We  have  been  talking  much  in  this  country  of 
Municipal  Reform  ;  and  that  phrase,  when  applied  to 
existing  conditions  in  various  cities,  embraces  obviously, 
a  great  range  and  diversity  of  specific  needs.  But  it  is 
well  for  us  that  we  should  understand  clearly  that,  in 
the  present  stage  of  our  progress,  Municipal  Reform 
means  before  all  else  civil  service  reform,  and  that  the 
abolition  of  the  personal  and  party  spoils  system  from 
our  municipal  administrations  is  the  one  and  only 
remedy  for  the  worst  of  our  present  evils  in  city  govern¬ 
ment. 

Good  government  in  itself  is  a  fit  and  desirable 
thing,  and  patriotism  demands  it  ;  for  how  can  the 
citizen  love  his  country  as  he  ought  if  its  administra¬ 
tion  is  habitually  corrupt  and  inefficient,  and  if  there  is 
altogether  lacking  in  the  exercise  of  public  authority 
the  attributes  of  disinterestedness,  of  dignity,  and  of 
equal  beneficence  towards  all  citizens,  regardless  of 
party,  race,  or  other  distinction  ?  Nevertheless,  while 
I  do  not  fail  to  appreciate  the  fitness  and  the  moral 
beauty  of  good  government  as  an  abstract  considera¬ 
tion,  I  have  always,  in  the  application  of  government 
to  local  and  municipal  affairs,  preferred  to  think  of 
government  as  a  means  to  an  end  rather  than  an  object 
in  itself. 

Municipal  government  in  our  day  has  come  to  be 
Collectivism,  on  a  vast  and  ever  more  diversified  scale. 
I  am  familiar  with  the  abstract  discussions,  current 


4 


nowadays*  dealing  with  the  question  whether  or  not 
/  invni^jpal  government  may  be  rightly  termed  a  matter 
r  of  -basinets.  These  discussions  deal  only  with  defini¬ 

tions.  They  play  with  words  and  phrases.  I  am  not 
able  to  see  that  they  bear  upon  the  real  work  that  we 
have  before  us  in  this  country. 

Nor  do  I  see  anything  practical  to  be  gained  at 
present  by  arguments,  either  for  or  against  the  extension 
of  the  working  functions  of  municipal  government  in 
the  direction  of  local  Collectivism,  or,  as  some  people 
prefer  to  put  it,  Socialism.  The  principles  of  municipal 
collectivism  were  established  long  ago.  What  we  have 
to  deal  with  now  is  the  practical  working  out  of  those 
principles  in  concrete  instances,  as  such  instances 
arise. 

Inasmuch  as  we  are  not  going  to  revive  the  system 
of  private  wells  and  town  pumps,  but  are  universally 
committed  in  all  enlightened  cities  to  a  public  water 
supply,  it  clearly  behooves  us  to  see  that  the  public 
supply  is  procured  and  distributed  upon  the  best  possible 
engineering,  financial,  and  sanitary  principles.  Inas¬ 
much  as  we  have  no  intention  of  going  back  in  this 
country  to  the  very  recent  period  of  private  cesspools 
and  open  drains,  it  behooves  us  to  deal  in  the  most 
enlightened  way  with  the  problem  of  drainage,  to  the 
end  that  the  sewer  system  may  perfectly  fit  the  local 
situation,  and  that  the  ultimate  sewage  disposal  may 
meet  the  requirements  of  sanitary  science,  with  a  due 
regard  to  the  economic  principles  involved.  Since  good 
streets,  well  made  and  well  kept,  are  a  public  necessity, 
and  we  have  no  intention  of  relapsing  to  primitive  con¬ 
ditions  in  that  respect,  it  plainly  devolves  upon  us  to 
make  the  paving  as  good  and  as  durable  as  engineering 
experience  can  devise,  and  to  clean  the  streets  as 
perfectly  as  the  health  and  comfort  of  the  community 
would  require.  Inasmuch  as  we  do  not  intend  to  revert 
to  the  period  when  vagrancy,  common  begging,  street 
rowdyism,  and  a  great  variety  of  ordinary  nuisances  and 
minor  misdemeanors  were  freely  tolerated  as  a  matter 
of  course,  but  on  the  contrary  do  intend  to  maintain 


s 


conditions  of  order,  decency,  and  safety  throughout  the 
bounds  of  the  community,  it  needs  no  argument  to  show 
that  we  ought  to  avail  ourselves  of  the  best  possible 
methods  in  the  organization  and  management  of  the 
police  service,  and  of  the  establishments  that  have  to  do 
with  the  detention  and  correction  of  offenders  and  with 
the  relief  of  distress.  Since,  furthermore,  we  have 
long  ago  accepted  the  principle  that  it  is  both  the  right 
and  the  duty  of  the  community  to  make  provision  for 
the  instruction  of  all  children,  to  the  end  that  our 
average  standards  of  civilization  may  not  decline  in  the 
process  of  transmission  from  one  generation  to  the  next, 
it  is  plain  enough  that  our  public  schools  ought  to  be 
as  good  as  they  can  possibly  be  made,  and  that  their 
methods  ought,  from  time  to  time,  to  be  adjusted  to 
meet  the  new  needs  of  a  changing  situation. 

These  statements  are  the  merest  commonplace.  The 
man  who  in  our  day  would  argue  against  good  water, 
good  drainage,  good  streets  and  good  schools,  as  proper 
things  for  a  community  to  secure  by  collective  action, 
would  be  looked  upon  as  a  mere  anachronism,  or  else  as 
an  after-dinner  theorizer  whose  views  have  nothing  to 
do  with  those  practical  concerns  that  belong  to  the 
working  hours  of  the  day. 

And  yet,  while  everybody  believes  that  these  things 
belong  to  what  may  be  called  the  irreducible  minimum 
of  a  modern  city’s  public  necessities,  how  many  of  our 
cities  actually  possess  them  ?  Certainly  not  many.  If 
the  water  supply  suffices  in  quantity,  in  too  many 
instances  it  falls  short  in  quality.  If  the  ramification  of 
sewers  is  sufficient  to  collect  liquid  waste,  it  too 
frequently  happens  that  proper  provision  is  not  made 
for  the  disposal  of  sewage.  If  the  street  system  is 
judiciously  laid  out,  it  is  seldom  the  case  that  good 
paving  extends  beyond  a  few  streets,  or  that  there  is 
any  efficient  system  for  keeping  the  streets  clean.  If 
the  school  houses  provide  places  enough  for  the  child¬ 
ren  who  ought  to  attend,  which  is  not  the  case  in  the 
great  majority  of  our  large  towns,  it  is  seldom  that 
the  system  or  the  methods  of  instruction  come  any- 


6 


where  near  meeting  the  proper  demands  of  the  present 
day. 

Now  I  am  well  aware  that  I  have  sometimes  been 
accused  of  presenting  an  unduly  favorable  view  of  con¬ 
temporary  conditions  in  European  cities.  I  have  only 
to  reply  that  what  I  have  said  about  cities  abroad  is  in 
plain  print  and  is  true.  In  many  things  that  belong  to 
the  functions  of  the  modern  city,  most  of  the  European 
towns  are  relatively  in  advance  of  our  own.  Nor  is  it 
true  that  the  better  municipal  appointments  of  European 
cities  are  to  be  attributed  either  to  their  greater  age  or 
to  their  superior  wealth  ;  for  they  are  not  so  rich  as  our 
cities  by  any  means,  nor,  considered  as  modern  urban 
communities,  are  they  any  older.  All  cities  of  the 
modern  type  belong  to  the  existing  regime  of  steam 
transportation  and  industry.  For  all  purposes  that 
municipal  administration  has  now  to  concern  itself  with, 
the  modern  city  is  nowhere  fifty  years  old.  Considered 
as  a  great  urban  centre,  Chicago  is  of  about  the  same 
age  as  Berlin  ;  and  Boston,  New  York  and  Baltimore 
are  as  old  as  Glasgow,  London  and  Hamburg.  Con¬ 
sidered  for  purposes  of  modern  improvements,  Cincin¬ 
nati,  for  example,  is  as  old  as  any  city  of  its  size  in 
Europe,  and  richer  than  almost  any  that  could  be 
named. 

Why,  then,  to  cut  short  these  comparisons,  have 
European  cities  accomplished  more  than  our  own  in 
these  practical,  concrete  directions  ?  I  have  thought 
about  the  matter  a  good  deal,  and  have  investigated  it 
very  considerably,  studying  home  conditions  quite  as 
carefully  as  I  have  those  abroad,  although  I  have 
written  more  about  European  cities.  And  I  have 
reached  one  firm  conclusion,  which  is  that  with  any¬ 
thing  like  as  good  administration  in  this  country  as  in 
Europe,  we  should  have  been  not  simply  as  far  advanced 
in  our  municipal  appointments,  but  vastly  further 
advanced  than  the  European  cities,  because  all  the 
material  conditions  have  been  so  much  more  favorable 
in  our  own  country. 

We  have  done  many  things  extremely  well  in  this 


7 


country,  for  the  reason  that  private  initiative  possesses 
intense  energy  and  high  efficiency.  And  it  has 
happened  once  in  a  while,  by  a  stroke  of  luck,  that  some 
department  of  public  administration  has  for  the  moment 
borrowed  the  personal  resources  of  private  enterprise. 
Now,  it  happens  that  in  England,  France  and  Ger¬ 
many,  municipal  work  is  carried  on  under  a  system 
which  normally  gives  the  public  the  benefit  of  the  best 
efforts  of  the  best  trained  men.  With  us,  public  work  is 
carried  on  under  a  system  which  normally  gives  the 
public  something  less  than  the  best  efforts  of  men  who 
average  far  below  the  best. 

Previous  to  1890,  New  York  had  spent  vastly  more  ^ 
money  for  street  paving  than  any  city  of  comparable 
size  or  conditions  in  Europe  ;  and  yet  New  York  had 
only  one  or  two  well-paved  streets.  And  this  is  typical. 

No  language  can  well  exaggerate  the  frightful  losses 
that  American  communities  have  suffered  in  the  thirty 
years  since  the  civil  war  through  bad  administration. 
Thousands  of  millions  of  dollars  would  only  begin  to 
express  the  tangible  losses.  And  I  hold  the  spoils 
annex  of  the  American  party  system  as  chiefly  respon¬ 
sible  for  this  waste  of  resources  and  of  opportunities.  y. 

Certain  American  visitors,  who  have  recently  taken 
a  glance  here  and  there  at  politics  in  Europe,  have  come 
home  to  sneer  at  the  demands  of  those  in  this  country 
who  advocate  administrative  reform  in  our  cities  and 
who  sometimes  cite  European  experiences  as  affording 
instructive  lessons.  These  scornful  personages  have  in 
their  turn  sought  to  convince  the  people  ©f  this  country 
that  partisanship  prevails  in  precisely  the  same  way  in 
European  cities,  and  particularly  in  those  of  England, 
as  we  have  been  accustomed  to  see  partisanship  prevail 
in  our  American  cities. 

I  absolutely  deny  that  this  is  true.  It  is  true,  that, — 
to  an  extent  which  would  seem  to  me  to  be  unfortunate, 

— the  annual  elections,  which  fill  one- third  of  the  seats  in 
the  municipal  councils  of  England  have  recently  been 
fought  to  an  increasing  extent  upon  the  Liberal  and 
Conservative  lines  of  the  national  parties.  Neverthe- 


8 


less,  it  is  worthwhile  here  to  observe  that  in  the  recent 
elections  held  on  November  ist,  there  were  as  usual  a 
very  great  number  of  non- contested  seats,  which  simply 
means  that  the  councilman  for  a  given  ward,  regardless 
of  his  preferences  in  national  politics,  had  served  his 
constituents  in  local  matters  so  well  that  nobody  opposed 
his  re-election  for  another  term  ;  and  thus  his  unopposed 
nomination  gave  him  another  three  years  of  office  with¬ 
out  the  expense  or  trouble  of  holding  an  election  in  his 
ward.  The  revolt  of  the  Liberal  Unionists  in  England, 
which  made  an  intense  feeling  between  the  Gladstonians 
and  the  followers  of  Mr.  Chamberlain,  was  to  a  con¬ 
siderable  extent  responsible  for  the  infusion  of  national 
politics  in  the  municipal  elections.  But  even  in  Birm¬ 
ingham,  where  these  November  elections  for  the  town 
council  have  often  been  most  stubbornly  contested,  I 
have  not  been  able  to  discover  that  there  is  the  slightest 
taint  of  partisanship  in  appointments,  or  in  the  practical 
work  of  administration. 

In  one-fourth  of  these  English  municipalities  holding 
their  regular  elections  last  November,  the  polls  were 
not  opened  in  a  single  ward,  for  the  reason  that  only  one 
candidate  was  presented  in  each  division.  In  the 
remaining  three-fourths  of  the  English  municipal 
corporations  there  were  also  of  course  a  great  number 
of  uncontested  wards.  In  many  instances  where  con¬ 
tests  did  occur,  it  is  true  (as  I  have  taken  pains  to 
ascertain),  that  there  was  no  question  of  party  politics 
involved,  but  only  local  or  personal  questions. 

In  Liverpool,  on  the  other  hand,  the  fight  was  a 
very  spirited  one  on  party  lines,  although  even  there  in 
seven  wards,  one-fourth  of  the  whole  number,  no  con¬ 
test  was  made.  It  happens  that  just  now  the  advanced 
Liberals  in  England  are  trying  in  every  way  to  show 
that  the  tide  of  national  feeling  is  turning  against  the 
existing  Tory  government.  For  this  reason  the  Liver¬ 
pool  Radicals  contested  nineteen  Conservative  council 
seats.  But  in  eighteen  cases  out  of  the  nineteen,  the 
public  preferred  to  endorse  things  as  they  were  rather 
than  to  make  a  change. 


9 


In  another  English  town,  every  one  of  thd  retiring 
members  was  a  candidate  for  re-election,  and  every  one 
of  them  was  defeated ;  but  this  was  because  public 
opinion  was  in  favor  of  a  new  municipal  water  supply, 
and  elected  new  men  who  were  committed  to  the  desired 
policy.  In  the  great  town  of  Sheffield  there  were  con¬ 
tests  in  only  two  wards.  But  the  great  and  significant 
point  that  I  wish  to  enforce  is  that  in  not  one  of  all 
these  English  towns  was  there  involved,  even  incident¬ 
ally,  the  idea  that  the  result  could  in  any  wise  affect  the 
appointive  offices,  either  for  or  against  members  of  any 
political  party. 

If  the  chief  of  police,  the  superintendent  of  water 
supply,  the  head  of  the  public  library,  the  superinten¬ 
dent  of  the  municipal  gas  works,  the  manager  of  the 
great  sewage  disposal  establishment,  or  any  other  of 
the  principal  working  heads  of  departments,  should 
resign,  it  is  almost  inconceivable  that  the  party  results 
of  an  election  for  the  municipal  council  would  have  the 
slightest  effect  upon  the  appointment  of  a  successor  to 
such  a  department  head.  Far  less  is  it  conceivable  that 
the  victory  of  one  party  or  the  other  in  a  municipal 
election  should  result  in  the  removal  of  an  efficient  head 
of  a  department  for  the  sake  of  giving  the  place,  for 
partisan  or  personal  reasons,  to  someone  connected  with 
the  victorious  element.  It  is  absolutely  agreed  on  all 
hands  in  England  that  the  discretionary  heads  of 
administrative  municipal  departments  shall  be  selected 
for  their  fitness,  regardless  of  their  party  affiliations, 
and  that  they  shall  be  retained  so  long  as  their  conduct 
is  good  and  their  services  are  efficient.  And  if  this  is 
true  of  heads  of  departments,  it  is  hardly  necessary  to 
add  that  it  is  also  true  of  the  entire  ramification  of 
subordinate  appointments. 

So  far  as  practical  every-day  administration  is  con¬ 
cerned,  a  large  part  of  the  difference  between  the 
English  municipal  system  and  the  system  established 
by  the  new  charter  of  the  Greater  New  York  lies  in  the 
fact  that  in  England  the  municipal  council  exercises 
the  appointing  power,  while  in  New  York  the  appoint- 


«  ‘  '  *  r  r 

^ng^  fe  exercised  by  the  mayor.  The  working 

hdnlifilstfation  is  carried  on  in  England  by  a  number  of 
appointed  heads  of  departments,  and  the  same  thing 
may  be  said  of  the  government  of  the  Greater  New 
York.  In  England  those  heads  of  departments  are 
chosen  by  the  municipal  council,  working  through  its 
committees.  In  New  York  they  are  to  be  chosen  by 
the  mayor.  If  the  very  large  Tory  majority  in  the  Liver¬ 
pool  municipal  council  should  decide  to  dismiss  existing 
heads  of  departments  in  order  to  appoint  Tories  to 
succeed  them, — selected  on  the  New  York  plan  with 
special  reference  to  private  and  personal  as  well  as 
political  affiliations, — such  an  act  would  involve  a 
greater  change  in  the  actual  system  of  government  in 
England  than  would  be  involved  in  changing  the  con¬ 
stitutional  monarchy  to  an  absolute  monarchy  like  that 
of  Russia.  The  repudiation  of  a  non-partisan  civil 
service  on  purely  business  principles  under  the  merit 
system,  would  signify  a  change  incomparably  more  vital 
than  any  possible  variations  in  the  mere  outward  struc¬ 
ture  of  municipal  government, — such  for  instance  as 
appear  when  one  compares  the  typical  English  muni¬ 
cipal  system  with  the  French,  the  German,  or  even  that 
which  the  Greater  New  York  Charter  provides. 

Further  than  that,  the  making  of  partisan  appoint¬ 
ments  to  office  would  be  deemed  in  English  towns  not 
merely  a  blow  at  the  efficiency  of  administration,  but 
also  a  violation  of  every  principle  of  civic  justice  and 
equality,  a  proscription  of  half  the  tax-paying  com¬ 
munity  by  the  governing  authorities, — in  short,  an  act 
of  hostility,  which  carried  on  to  its  logical  end  would 
mean  the  denial  of  civic  rights  to  all  citizens  not  adher¬ 
ing  to  a  single  political  party,  or,  in  a  word,  civil  war. 
At  least  the  sharp  drawing  of  political  lines  in  muni¬ 
cipal  appointments  in  England  would  now  be  deemed 
by  public  opinion  to  be  practically  as  objectionable  as 
political  discrimination  in  courts  of  justice,  or  as  the 
exemption  from  taxation  of  all  the  adherents  of  the 
party  in  power.  And  the  same  thing  may  be  said  con¬ 
cerning  the  generally  excellent  public  service  that 


one  finds  in  French,  German,  and  other  continental 
cities. 

When  therefore  American  politicians  return  from 
their  brief  vacations  in  Europe  to  tell  us  that  they  find 
party  lines  recognized  in  municipal  elections  abroad, 
they  have  told  us  only  a  very  limited  part  of  the  truth. 
There  is  no  such  thing  in  England,  or  France,  or 
Germany,  as  a  partisan  management  of  municipal  public 
works.  I  have  known  such  a  thing  in  an  American 
city  as  ninety-nine  per  cent,  of  the  common  labor 
employed  (to  an  extent  of  hundreds  of  workmen  on 
streets  and  other  public  work),  adhering  not  only  to  the 
national  party,  but  also  to  the  local  faction  of  the  party 
that  held  the  reins  of  municipal  power  for  the  time 
being.  And  I  have  known,  as  everyone  else  in  this  7^ 
country  has,  of  more  than  one  city  where  at  least  nine- 
tenths  of  the  public  appointees  holding  positions  requir¬ 
ing  skill  or  the  exercise  of  discretion  have  also  been 
filled  in  the  same  way  by  the  henchmen  of  a  political 
boss  or  faction. 

As  our  civilization  advances  further,  and  as  the 
necessary  functions  of  a  municipal  government  become 
more  varied  and  elaborate,  this  American  system  of 
partisanship  in  appointments  becomes  more  and  more 
intolerable.  Favoritism  to  the  extent  of  a  partisan 
appointment  or  two  in  the  health  service  may  mean  a 
great  epidemic,  with  paralysis  of  business  as  well  as 
loss  of  life,  where  the  European  system  of  non-partisan¬ 
ship  would  have  meant  perfect  safety. 

Just  now  there  is  much  agitation  throughout  the 
United  States  touching  the  question  of  the  proper  regu¬ 
lation  in  the  general  interest  of  such  quasi-public 
services  as  the  supply  of  illumination  and  the  provision 
of  transit  facilities.  One  hears  the  advocacy  of  public 
ownership  even  in  strange  and  unexpected  quarters. 

The  workingmen  of  the  City  of  New  York  have  of  late 
especially  identified  themselves  with  the  demand  for  a 
great  extension  of  the  functions  of  municipal  govern¬ 
ment.  Yet  they  have  elected  as  mayor,  a  gentleman 
who  approached  the  assumption  of  his  official  duties 


12 


with  the  one  bold  and  unqualified  announcement  that 
nobody  could  even  be  considered  for  an  appointment, 
unless  he  belonged  to  the  Democratic  party, — by  which 
he  meant  Tammany  Hall  and  its  affiliated  organiza¬ 
tions.  Surely  the  workingmen  of  New  York  ought  to 
have  intelligence  enough  to  understand  that  a  non¬ 
partisan  administration,  based  strictly  upon  reasonable 
assurances  of  long  tenure  and  of  promotion  on  principles 
of  fitness,  must  be  the  sine  qua  non  of  any  successful 
extension  of  municipal  functions. 

They  have  learned  something  of  successful  experi¬ 
ments  abroad  in  the  municipalization  of  lighting  sup¬ 
plies,  and  even  of  street  railroads ;  and  they  are  clamor¬ 
ing  for  a  radical  advance  in  such  directions  by  our 
American  cities.  But  if  they  care  for  these  things  they 
should  have  learned  also  that  there  is  no  partisanship  in 
Glasgow’s  municipal  transit, — which  has  been  made  suc¬ 
cessful  through  the  meritorious  labors  of  Mr.  John 
Young  precisely  as  street- cleaning  in  New  York  has  been 
made  successful  through  the  meritorious  labors  of 
Colonel  Waring. 

How  has  it  happened  that  a  place  like  Glasgow  has 
proceeded  to  increase  the  range  of  its  important  munici¬ 
pal  activities?  The  answer  is  perfectly  plain.  That 
city  was  emboldened  to  try  new  ventures  because  its 
non-partisan  administration  of  earlier  ones  had  been 
thoroughly  satisfactory.  John  Young  had  been  the 
Colonel  Waring  of  Glasgow  for  a  good  many  years. 
That  is  to  say,  he  had  been  superintendent  of  the  cleans¬ 
ing  department,  and  had  worked  out  and  administered 
a  remarkably  perfect  system  for  the  cleansing  of  the 
streets  and  the  collection  and  disposal  of  garbage.  If 
anybody  knows  John  Young’s  politics,  certainly  nobody 
cares.  He  has  been  allowed  to  organize  and  manage 
the  municipal  street  railway  service  on  strict  business 
principles,  and  has  promptly  made  a  success  of  it — 
precisely  as  Colonel  Waring,  if  commissioned  to  organ- 
ize  and  manage  a  municipal  lighting  service,  or  a  transit 
service,  would  have  no  difficulty  in  carrying  the  matter 
out  as  successfully  as  any  like  services  elsewhere. 


1/ 


r3 

If  the  workingmen  of  New  York  had  really  wanted 
to  take  the  short  cut  to  enlarged  municipal  ownership 
and  operation,  they  ought  to  have  voted  for  Seth  Low, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  Seth  Low  was  pledged  to 
organize  a  municipal  administration  on  strict  business 
principles,  free  from  the  taint  of  politics,  precisely  as 
Glasgow  or  Berlin  is  organized.  Tammany,  in  its 
latest  platform,  professes  to  have  become  converted  to 
the  principles  of  enlarged  municipal  ownership  of 
natural  monopolies  of  supply.  But  in  the  very  same 
breath  Tammany  informs  us  that  a  municipal  lighting 
plant,  for  instance,  if  established  in  New  York,  shall 
not  be  managed  by  a  man  selected  solely  for  his  fitness 
to  manage  such  a  business,  but  must  be  managed  in  any 
case  by  a  politician  belonging  to  Tammany  Hall. 

Nothing  more  ignominious  in  all  the  history  of 
American  municipal  government  has  ever  been  wit¬ 
nessed  than  the  recent  confession  on  the  part  of  the  city 
government  of  Philadelphia  that  it  was  incompetent 
to  manage  the  lighting  supply,  and  its  transfer  by  lease 
for  a  long  term  of  years  of  the  municipal  gas  plant  to  a 
private  corporation.  Nearly  every  large  city  in  Europe 
conducts  the  business  of  supplying  light  as  a  municipal 
department.  Under  any  ordinary  decent  system  of 
administration,  there  is  probably  no  department  of 
municipal  business  so  simple  in  its  nature  and  so  per¬ 
fectly  easy  to  finance  and  to  administer  as  a  gas  supply. 
The  European  cities  have  been  conspicuously  successful 
in  this  particular  branch  of  their  municipal  business. 
They  have  justified  the  experiment  of  the  municipaliza¬ 
tion  of  lighting  supplies  by  making  the  venture  finan¬ 
cially  beneficial  to  the  public  treasury,  by  greatly 
improving  the  public  lighting  of  the  streets,  and  above 
all  by  a  greatly  diffused  and  cheapened  supply  to 
private  citizens.  Where  European  cities  have  been  so  > 
successful  Philadelphia  has  confessed  failure;  and  the 
sole  reason  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  party  spoils  system, 
rather  than  the  merit  system,  has  dominated  the  city 
government.  S? 

The  police,  the  fire  department,  the  care  of  the 


14 


streets,  the  erection  of  public  works,  the  water  supply, 
the  sanitary  services,  and  all  the  varied  practical  busi¬ 
ness  of  carrying  on  a  modern  city, — these  are  not 
properly  matters  of  party  politics.  Such  public  interests 
should,  in  their  every-day  working,  be  as  free  from  the 
bias  of  partisan  politics  as  the  administration  of  justice. 
Most  people  in  this  country  admit  that  school  teachers 
ought  not  to  be  appointed  for  party  reasons  ;  and  we 
shall  in  time  come  to  see  with  perfect  clearness  that  all 
other  departments  of  local  administration,  not  less  than 
the  schools,  must  for  efficiency’s  sake  be  put  on  the 
basis  of  pure  merit.  When  that  time  arrives  it  will  be 
safe  for  the  municipality  to  extend  its  functions,  if  such 
extension  should  seem  desirable. 

But  on  the  other  hand  it  might  then  appear  to  make 
very  much  less  difference.  For  example,  I  do  not  find 
that  in  a  German  city  it  signifies  much  one  way  or  the 
other  whether  the  municipal  government  itself  provides 
an  electrical  plant  and  runs  it,  or  gives  a  charter  to  a 
private  company.  This  is  because  in  Germany  the 
municipal  governments  are  efficient  enough  to  take  full 
care  of  the  rights  of  citizens.  And  so,  if  a  private  com¬ 
pany  is  to  manage  the  electrical  supply,  it  will  proceed 
under  the  terms  of  a  franchise  that  exacts  everything 
that  is  right,  both  for  the  municipal  treasury  and  also 
for  the  private  user  of  electric  light  or  power.  But 
where,  as  in  this  country,  municipal  administration  is 
on  a  party  basis,  and  the  party  is  locally  controlled  by  a 
clique  or  a  boss,  there  is  no  one  who  is  looking  out 
efficiently  for  the  rights  of  the  city  or  of  the  citizens.  The 
corporation  seeking  a  franchise  is  looking  out  for  its  own 
interests,  and  the  politicians  in  control  of  the  municipal 
situation  are  looking  out  for  themselves  and  their  party 
machine.  The  consequence  is  that  the  city  and  the 
citizens  are  usually  betrayed.  Those  who  ought  to 
serve  the  community  are  traitors  to  it.  The  treasury 
of  the  city  goes  empty,  while  the  treasury  of  the  party 
machine  is  enriched.  In  Europe,  with  permanent  non¬ 
partisan  administrative  and  law  officers  in  positions  of 
authority,  franchises  are  always  carefully  drawn  in  the 


*5 


interest  of  the  public,  and  it  is  practically  impossible  for 
a  private  corporation  to  obtain  any  public  privilege  that 
is  not  paid  for  at  its  full  worth.  Under  our  system,  on 
the  contrary,  the  party  spoils  administration  breaks 
down  public  ownership  as  in  Philadelphia,  and  makes  it 
easy  for  private  ownership  to  rob  the  community  of 
valuable  franchises,  as  in  New  York. 

In  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter,  'it  would  seem  to 
me  that  all  honest  citizens, — whatever  their  point  of  view 
regarding  such  questions  as  public  ownership  or  the 
extension  of  municipal  functions, — ought  to  be  able  to 
unite  upon  the  indispensable  prerequisite  of  administra¬ 
tion  upon  business  principles,  whether  the  work  of  the 
municipality  is  to  be  enlarged  or  whether  it  is  to  be 
diminished.  A  more  practical  issue  cannot  be  named. 
And  so  long  as  the  existing  political  parties  decline  to 
accept  the  principle  of  non-partisanship  in  the  making 
of  municipal  appointments  and  the  carrying  on  of 
municipal  business,  there  will  of  necessity  be  a  field  for 
independent  action  in  city  elections.  When,  as  in  Eng¬ 
land  or  on  the  European  continent,  our  political  parties 
shall  have  abandoned  the  local  spoils  system  frankly  and 
in  good  faith,  they  may  strive  for  victory  in  municipal 
campaigns  as  much  as  they  please  and  without 
reproach. 


SECOND  PAPER. 


By  Horace  E.  Deming. 


Political  partisanship  may  properly  be  roused  to  most  in¬ 
tense  activity  in  determining  whether  there  shall  be  high  tariff 
or  low  tariff,  protection  with  incidental  revenue  or  revenue 
with  incidental  protection ;  but  there  is  no  proper  place  for 
political  partisanship  in  collecting  the  revenue  honestly.  The 
country  may  be  storm  swept  by  the  contending  political  poli¬ 
cies  of  the  single  gold  standard  and  a  dual  gold  and  silver 
standard  at  a  fixed  ratio ;  but  whichever  policy  wins  the  work 


1 6 


at  the  government  mint  demands  not  political  partisanship, 
however  pure  or  however  intense,  but  plain  every  day  honest 
work  for  honest  wage. 

A  wide  gulf  lies  between  questions  of  public  policy  on 
which  men  divide  into  opposing  political  parties  and  questions 
that  involve  merely  the  honest  and  efficient  administration  of 
public  business.  Civil  Service  Reform  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  former  questions.  It  does  not  concern  itself  with  them. 
With  questions  of  administration  it  does  and  must  concern  it¬ 
self  until  all  appointments  to  government  positions  having 
nothing  to  do  with  determining  questions  of  public  policy  on 
which  men  divide  into  political  parties  are  made  solely  for 
merit  and  fitness  without  regard  to  any  partisan  political  con¬ 
siderations  whatsoever. 

In  short,  civil  service  reform  is  an  administrative  reform, 
not  a  political  reform.  It  seeks  to  exclude  “  politics  ”  alto¬ 
gether  from  the  business-side  of  the  government’s  operations. 
Civil  service  reform  means  that  all  employees  of  the  govern¬ 
ment  having  merely  to  do  with  matters  of  administration  shall 
be  appointed,  shall  hold  their  places,  and  shall  be  discharged 
not  because  they  or  their  sponsors  have  or  have  not  done  po¬ 
litical  party  service  but  because  the  employee  is  personally  fit 
or  unfit  for  his  position. 

This  principle  is  aptly  called  the  merit  principle.  How  far 
is  it  an  important  factor  in  the  solution  of  the  problem  of 
municipal  government  ?  To  those  who  have  investigated  the 
nature  of  the  municipal  problem  the  answer  is  almost  too  self 
evident.  To  others  it  may  be  of  service  to  be  reminded  for  a 
moment  how  some  of  the  chief  activities  of  a  municipality, 
those  which  concern  most  intimately  the  daily  life  of  its  citi¬ 
zens,  have  come  into  existence. 

When  a  trail  has  become  a  cartroad  the  cartroad  a  high¬ 
way,  the  highway  a  constantly  traveled  and  closely  thronged 
city  street,  the  proper  maintenance  and  care  of  the  latter  is  an 
administrative  problem  of  the  greatest  importance  to  scores  of 
thousands  and  it  may  be  to  hundreds  and  hundreds  of 
thousands.  It  is  often  also  a  problem  of  the  greatest  diffi¬ 
culty.  Experience  has  demonstrated  that  the  streets  cannot 
even  be  kept  clean  without  the  aid  of  the  merit  principle. 

The  isolated  house  on  the  prairie  or  the  hill-side  is  kept 
healthy  by  the  simplest  sanitary  measures  and  its  location  may 


i7 


be  such  that  it  remains  healthy  in  spite  of  a  reckless  disregard 
of  even  ordinary  sanitary  precautions.  The  building  in  the 
congested  tenement  region  of  a  crowded  city  not  only  breeds 
enfeebled  vitality  and  too  often  death  among  its  own  occupants 
unless  extraordinary  sanitary  precautions  are  enforced,  but  be¬ 
comes  a  radiating  centre  of  disease.  The  enforcement  of 
these  precautions  is  a  matter  of  administration;  and  the  lower 
the  death  rate  of  a  city  the  higher  the  appreciation  and  the 
more  rigid  the  enforcement  of  the  merit  principle  in  the  ad¬ 
ministration  of  the  city’s  health  ordinances. 

A  sparse  population  may  be  sufficiently  served  by  a  single 
teacher  in  a  one  roomed  school  house  and  the  teacher  may 
build  the  fire,  sweep  the  school  room  and  teach  his  score  or 
two  of  scholars.  When  each  school  house  must  accommodate 
a  thousand  pupils  and  there  must  be  hundreds  of  such  school 
houses,  the  administrative  problem  becomes  one  of  the  first 
magnitude.  Without  the  merit  system  the  problem  is  insol¬ 
uble.  Go  to  any  city  in  the  land ;  if  its  public  school  system 
is  successful,  you  will  find  the  merit  principle  actively  enforced 
by  the  department  of  education ;  if  its  public  school  system 
is  a  failure  the  merit  principle  is  absent  or  but  lamely  recog¬ 
nized. 

Wherever  there  is  a  multitude  in  a  limited  area  good  order 
must  be  enforced,  laws  in  the  interest  of  public  morals  must 
be  observed,  peace  must  be  preserved  and  a  special  group  ot 
the  citizens  must  be  set  apart  from  the  rest  and  charged  with 
the  duty  and  the  responsibility  of  enforcing  the  laws  and  pre¬ 
serving  order  and  peace.  Is  this  class  corrupt  ?  Does  it  sell 
protection  to  vice  and  overlook  violations  of  law  for  its  own 
private  gain  then  there  is  no  merit  principle  in  the  police  ad¬ 
ministration.  When  you  find  the  wives  of  police  captains 
large  landlords  and  the  brothers  or  cousins  of  chiefs  of  police 
yacht  owners,  the  “  starch  ”  has  been  taken  out  of  police  civil 
service. 

What  we  have  said  of  streets,  of  the  public  health,  of  edu¬ 
cation  and  of  the  police  is  equally  applicable  to  each  of  the 
departments  of  municipal  public  service.  Each  is  largely,  if 
not  chiefly  an  administrative  problem,  and  good  administra¬ 
tion  whether  of  private  or  public  business  depends  in  its  last 
analysis  upon  the  selection  of  its  agents  solely  with  reference 
to  their  personal  merit  and  fitness.  In  the  public  service  the 


i8 


recognition  and  enforcement  of  this  truth  are  incomparably 
more  important  and  its  disregard  more  far  reaching  in  evil  re¬ 
sults  than  in  private  business. 

It  is  not  alone  that  the  private  employer  must  pay  in  his 
own  person  and  out  of  his  own  pocket  the  loss  occasioned  by 
his  unwise  selection  of  employees,  while  in  the  public  service 
the  public  treasury  pays  the  bill  and  the  official  superior  may 
even  profit  pecuniarily  and  politically  by  the  incompetence  or 
dishonesty  of  his  subordinates,  but  the  public  administrative 
service  is  subjected  to  a  new  master  as  each  change  of  politi¬ 
cal  policy  brings  a  new  party  into  power.  If  now  the  person¬ 
nel  of  the  purely  administrative  service  is  to  shift  with  each 
change  of  political  policy  efficient  administration  is  impossible 
no  matter  how  lavishly  the  public  funds  may  be  spent  to  secure 
it.  It  is  as  if  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Company  should 
change  its  directors  every  two  or  three  years  on  questions  of 
policy  such  as  extending  its  lines  by  lease  or  purchase,  con¬ 
structing  new  lines,  acquiring  additional  terminals  or  coal 
fields,  furnishing  through  transportation,  and  the  like,  and  with 
each  change  of  directors  should  call  into  its  service  an  entirely 
new  set  of  station  agents,  trainmen,  superintendents,  machin¬ 
ists  and  civil  engineers.  The  directors’  policy  might  be  never 
so  good,  the  administration  would  be  unspeakably  bad.  No 
one  doubts  or  denies  these  obvious  truths  as  applied  to  ordin¬ 
ary  business  affairs,  why  should  there  be  any  doubt  of  their 
being  equally  truths  and  equally  obvious  in  the  case  of  muni¬ 
cipal  government. 

It  is  not  surprising  therefore  that  there  is  not  a  well  gov¬ 
erned  city  anywhere  whose  civil  service  is  not  based  upon  the 
merit  principle  and  not  an  ill  governed  city  in  whose  civil  ser¬ 
vice  the  evil  effect  of  neglect  or  positive  disregard  of  this  prin¬ 
ciple  do  not  serve  as  an  example  and  a  warning.  These  pro¬ 
positions  are  true  of  the  cities  of  France  and  Spain  of  Ger¬ 
many  and  England  under  their  widely  varying  forms  of  gov¬ 
ernment  as  well  as  of  the  cities  in  our  democratic  republic. 
Municipal  government  whatever  its  form  and  in  whatever 
country  is  an  attempt  to  meet  the  common  needs  of  a  consid¬ 
erable  population  concentrated  within  a  limited  area.  What 
factor  is  or  can  be  so  important  in  the  solution  of  this  problem 
as  administrative  skill  and  honesty  ?  And  the  more  populous 
the  city  the  more  imperative  the  demand  for  honesty  and  skill 


*9 


in  administration.  Whatever  the  plan  of  municipal  govern¬ 
ment,  however  carefully  devised,  and  by  whomsoever  attemp¬ 
ted  to  be  carried  out,  it  is  always  and  everywhere  a  failure 
unless  the  merit  principle  obtains  in  the  municipal  public  ser¬ 
vice  and  the  measure  of  the  failure  is  the  extent  of  the  viola¬ 
tion  of  this  principle. 

But  while  it  is  true  that  civil  service  reform  is  an  adminis¬ 
trative  reform,  the  existence  or  absence  of  the  merit  principle 
in  the  public  service  is  also  a  decisive  factor  indetermining 
important  questions  of  purely  municipal  policy.  Shall  the  city 
own  or  operate  its  system  of  intra  mural  transit  ?  Shall  it  pro¬ 
vide  its  own  system  of  lighting  ?  Shall  it  undertake  on  an 
adequate  scale  the  economical  and  sanitary  disposition  of  the 
city’s  waste  ?  Shall  it  establish  museums  and  libraries  ?  Shall 
it  have  an  intelligent  system  of  large  and  small  parks  ?  Shall 
the  management  and  improvement  of  its  water  front  be  a  mat¬ 
ter  of  public  or  private  enterprise  ?  The  mere  aggregation  of 
population  within  a  small  area  creates  innumerable  sources  of 
revenue ;  shall  these  be  utilized  for  the  profit  of  the  public 
treasury  ?  Shall  the  city  go  on  indefinitely  giving  away  to 
private  individuals  the  income  its  own  existence  creates  and 
which  its  own  needs  require  ?  Must  the  tax  rate  go  ever 
higher  while  the  almost  exhaustless  streams  of  the  city’s  wealth 
forever  flow  into  private  coffers  ?  These  are  some  of  the  ques¬ 
tions  confronting  the  policy  determining  authority  of  every  con¬ 
siderable  city  in  this  and  other  countries.  Where  the  merit  prin¬ 
ciple  prevails  we  know  what  are  the  answers  to  these  questions. 
Where  the  merit  principle  is  absent  or  is  but  lamely  applied 
we  also  know  the  answers.  And  in  a  democratic  country 
these  answers  are  breeding  a  popular  unrest  and  a  political 
discontent  that  may  well  make  thoughtful  men.  pause.  The 
baleful  compact  between  the  political  “  boss  ”  and  the  cor¬ 
poration  which  exists  by  public  favor  and  lives  by  or  on  the 
public  revenue,  if  it  continues,  means  the  sure  destruction  of 
our  present  form  of  government,  and  what  may  then  take 
its  place  let  wiser  men  than  I  foretell. 

The  powerful  forces  underlying  modern  industrial  civiliza¬ 
tion  are  driving  a  larger  and  larger  proportion  of  the  popula¬ 
tion  into  the  cities.  In  our  older  States  the  city  dweller 
already  constitutes  the  majority  in  the  electorate.  The  City 
vote  chooses  the  majority  of  the  State  legislature.  The  boss 


20 


of  the  most  populous  city  in  the  State  aspires  to  be  and  often 
is  the  boss  of  the  State.  What  makes  this  possible  ?  Is  there 
any  doubt  that  not  the  least  important  reason  is  the  fact  that 
the  merit  principle  is  not  rigidly  enforced  in  the  municipal 
civil  service  ?  Imagine,  if  you  can,  a  city  boss  without  patron¬ 
age  or  hope  of  any,  with  nothing  to  give  and  nothing  to  prom¬ 
ise  save  at  his  own  personal  expense.  Is  it  not  true  that  so 
long  as,  the  merit  principle  is  absent  in  municipal  administra¬ 
tion  a  corrupting  political  force  is  steadily  at  work  producing 
the  political  boss  and  that  not  only  successful  municipal  gov¬ 
ernment  is  impossible  but  the  unclean  municipal  politics  begets 
unclean  state  politics  and  steadily  tends  to  create  a  national 
government  after  its  own  kind?  On  the  other  hand,  imagine 
New  York  City,  Buffalo,  Troy,  Albany,  Syracuse,  Rochester 
and  the  lesser  cities  of  New  York  State  each  a  city  without 
political  patronage  within  its  limits,  each  a  city  in  whose  public 
service  the  merit  principle  wholly  prevailed.  Municipal  gov¬ 
ernment  in  the  State  of  New  York  would  no  longer  be  a 
problem. 

Civil  Service  Reform  is  not  by  any  means  the  only  reform 
needed,  nor  will  good  government  be  accomplished  without 
the  aid  of  other  vital  reforms;  but  every  stride  forward  in 
Civil  Service  Reform  brings  their  accomplishment  nearer, 
makes  their  success  more  sure;  and  it  is  certain  that  a  suc¬ 
cessful  municipal  government  without  the  observance  of  the 
merit  principle  in  its  civil  service  is  unthinkable. 


Publications  of  the  New  York  Civil- Service  Reform  Ass'n 


The  Beginning  of  the  Spoils  System  in  the  National  Govern¬ 
ment,  1829-30.  (Reprinted,  by  permission,  from  Parton’s  “Life 
of  Andrew  Jackson.”)  Per  copy,  5  cts. 

Term  and  Tenure  of  Office.  By  Dorman  B.  Eaton.  Second  edition* 

abridged.  Per  copy,  15  cts. 

Daniel  Webster  and  the  Spoils  System.  An  extract  from  Senator 
Bayard’s  oration  at  Dartmouth  College,  June,  1882. 

A  Primer  of  Civil-Service  Reform,  prepared  by  George  William 
Curtis.  (English  and  German  Editions.) 

Address  of  Hon,  Carl  Schurz  in  opposition  to  the  bill  to  amend  the  New 
York  Civil  Service  laws,  commonly  known  as  the  “Black  Act.” 
May  6,  1897. 

Report  on  the  Operation  of  the  “  Black  Act.”  March  21,  1898. 
Annual  Reports  of  the  Civil  Service  Reform  Association  of  New 
York  for  the  years  1883-1898  inclusive.  Per  copy,  8  cts. 


MISCELLANEOUS. 

United  States  Civil-Service  Statutes  and  Revised  Rules  of  May 

6,  1896. 

State  Civil-Service  Reform  Acts  of  New  York  and  Massachu¬ 
setts. 

Decisions  and  Opinions  in  Construction  of  the  Civil-Service  Daws. 

(1890)  Per  copy,  15  cts. 

The  Meaning  of  Civil-Service  Reform.  By  E,  O.  Graves. 

The  Selection  of  Laborers.  (In  English  and  German  Editions).  By 
James  M.  Bugbee  late  of  the  Massachusetts  Civil-Service  Commission. 
Report  of  Select  Committee  on  Reform  in  the  Civil  Service 
(H.  R.),  regarding  the  registration  of  laborers  in  the  United  States 
Service. 

Report  of  same  Committee  regarding  selection  of  Fourth-Class 
Postmasters. 

The  Need  of  a  Classified  and  Non-Partisan  Census  Bureau- 

Report  of  a  Special  Committee  of  the  National  League.  (1898) 
George  William  Curtis.  A  commemorative  address  by  Parke  Godwin. 
(Published  by  the  Century  Association).  10  cents  per  copy. 


(a  charge  is  made  only  where  the  price  is  givrn.) 


Orders  for  the  publications  will  be  filled  by  George  McAneny,  Secre¬ 
tary,  54  William  St,  New  York,  or  by  G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons,  27  and  29  West 
23d  St.,  New  York 


PRESIDENT: 


CARL 

SCHURZ. 

SECRETARY: 

TREASURER: 

GEORGE  McANENY. 

A,  S.  FRISSELL. 

VICE-PRESIDENTS 


CHARLES  FRANCIS  ADAMS, 

HENRY  HITCHCOCK, 

AUGUSTUS  R.  MACDONOUGH, 

HENRY  C.  LEA, 

RT.  REV.  HENRY  C.  FOTTER, 

FRANKLIN  MACVEAGH, 

J.  HALL  PLEASANTS. 

RT.  REV*  P.  J.  RYAN, 

WILLIAM  POTTS. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


WILLIAM  A.  AIKEN, 

HERBERT  WELSH, 

CHARLES  J.  BONAPARTE, 

WILLIAM  G.  LOW, 

SILAS  W.  BURT, 

DORMAN  B.  EATON, 

EDWARD  CARY, 

WILLIAM  POTTS, 

CHARLES  COLLINS, 

CHARLES  RICHARDSON, 

LUCIUS  B.  SWIFT, 

SHERMAN  S.  ROGERS, 

RICHARD  H.  DANA, 

CARL  SCHURZ, 

JOHN  W.  ELA, 

EDWARD  M.  SHEPARD, 

WILLIAM 41  DUDLEY  FOULKE, 

MOORFIEL.D  STOREY, 

RICHARD  WATSON  GILDER, 

EVERETT  P.  WHEELER,  i 

MORRILL 

WYMAN,  JR. 

Office  of  the  League , 

No.  54  William  St.,  New  Y, 


